Mark, I understand that you believe that EH's material is being misrepresented. I'm just confused why people who believe it's being misrepresented don't make a greater effort to clear things up for those of us who are interested in learning about some of the other approaches that are out there.
Because it's like trying to have a discussion in a classroom where several of the students are screaming insults and throwing erasers when the HI crew is around. Been there, done that. I would be delighted to go into it at length on Steve's website.
Something just seems really strange. A few days ago I make a general comment about some differences that I see between Ted Williams swing and SE's (one-handed) swing on his website, and I get IMO some serious over- reaction from some that are familar with his material (you not being one of them). I basically get accused of misrepresenting what and how he teaches, along with a bunch of other nutty stuff.
If it's the occassion I'm thinking of, you used some terminology, inadvertently, that sounded like the HI crew. Case of mistaken identity I suppose.
It's just really strange that the people who use his material won't provide more detail as to what he teaches. It's almost as if the people who own his material have been directed not to publically reference his material. Pretty much what I hear is "you're wrong, that's not what EH teaches, go to his website or give him a call and find out what he teaches" I've been to his website, and doing that actually raised some red flags.
If you refer to the one handed swing, yeah that really needs to be replaced. It's on the list but it never seems to get done.
What I HAVE, learned, is that my apparent understanding of the load and unload process is wrong. Wonderful, terrific, super duper...I'm wrong. It wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong about something. However, now I'm curious as to why I'm wrong. I really am. If there is an issue with making information available to those who haven't purchased the EH material, I understand, I'm fine with that. But would it be possible for someone who has used the PCR approach to answer a simple more general question:
PCR would be Nyman's terms for analyzing a swing-not Steve Englishbey's terms. It doesn't imply a method for getting to good Posture, Connection and Rotation yet the HI crew continues to delight in repeating PCR and saying it's awful. For a good explanation of what the HI crew believes happens in the swing, check the "Early Barrel Movement" thread on baseball fever. PM me if you want a link. Is putting the live link on here ok by policy? Boardmember and Jbooth in that thread have the approach I like which is to analyze what's happening in the swing based on reality rather than feel. Once you decide what you think the goal is in terms of what do the best in the world do, then there are any number of ways to get there. Different ways work with different kids. If we are talking about a kid who is close, a little tweak and maybe a feel based cue might be just the ticket. With a kid who is not close, I favor a building block backward chaining approach.
Would Ted Williams agree with the PCR approach to the load and unload process?
Well, actually "PCR" is Nyman's attempt to try to introduce a way to talk about what is happening within a swing as opposed to the traditional cue based terms that mean different things to different people. Certainly no one would quibble with the Posture of Ted or any other elite MLB hitter. Same with how they connect the bodies rotation to the bat or how they rotate. So, by definition, Ted had good posture, connection and rotation. Argument comes with what some see in what elite hitters do. Some see this, some see that. Some think they can play with a bat, feel something, and shazam, they know what Barry is feeling. I doubt it. So the question should really be, what is Steve's approach to the load unload or what is EpsteinMankinSlaught etc's approach to the load unload.
Given what I've seen, I like Englishbey best. Yeager's people have been saying some pretty smart stuff on baseball fever so he may be a good resource. Mankin has a lot right but I don't think his top hand torque concept is reality. Epstein I've said for a long time will get you to a certain level quickly. Now it sounds like he has made some adjustments? Good. Slaught's RightView software is a GREAT resource for a parent with the money. His swing exposition is pretty good except for that rock skipping cue IMO. EVERYONE should read the late Jim Dixon's book "The Exceptional Athlete". While it's not really reality based in terms of physics and anatomy, if you can understand what his point is about how elite athletes move, it's well worth the read. Now that's the "camp" I'm in. If you want a feel for what Steve teaches, I suggest you sign up on the free public side and post your kid's swing clip for comment. Or just read the analysis of all the youth clips already there.